Posted on 10/01/2003 7:49:18 AM PDT by GulliverSwift
When it's time--probably late spring of next year--they can start spending the money. And they WILL spend it.
I mean a thoughtful review of what's occurred the past three years, and what's ahead.
Here's a thought from Fred Barnes . . . "President Bush has two other factors working for him. One is the unpopularity of the Democrats. Mark Penn, the pollster for Bill Clinton, found recently that the percentage of Americans who identify with the Democratic party (32 percent) is the lowest since before the New Deal, 70 years ago. The other is President Bush's current condition. If he's even with Democratic rivals now, with recovery just beginning and a spate of bad news from Iraq, imagine where he'll be when the recovery sets in and Iraq quiets down. When President Bush gets there, the media will have a new word for him: "favorite."
HUA!
Just for an example, look at CNN and MSNBC's ratings compared to Fox ratings.
Polls this far out as useless, the Dems are getting lots of "face time" because of their stupid debates.
From the Brit Hume interview the President hit the nail on the head. The Dems campaign right now is "I hate Bush", but when he goes one on one with the nominated Dem candidate, then it will be a different story (just remember the Gore/Bush debates.)
In the meantime just remember the words of John Paul Jones, "We have not yet begun to fight."
Backfires? Really? How do you explain Bush's ratings plummeting to 50%? Some of these charges, while not sticking to the Pres, ARE in fact tainting his image. He continues to refrain from fighting back at his own (and our) peril. Reticence to engage in combat is why I've dropped support for Cheney as VP, and would love to see Rice there... Frist and Hastert have equally been disasters... Thank God for DeLay and Talk Radio.
In Flori-duh, that would have meant an automatic vote for algore. ;p
Of course I can, even though we both know it will have little impact. You were around for all this stuff occurring, just like I was.
leave the troops out of it, the success/failure in Afganistan or Iraq is not assured at this point.
I'll do no such thing. We're at war against terrorists. This Administration, filled with brilliant and courageous people, knows that. Your "perfect economy" which may be miraculously created when you don't vote for Dubya won't last long when the Sears Tower is leveled and/or an entire airport is wiped out by chem/bio weapons. The offensive use of our troops is remarkable and courageous. And terrorists are finding out their training against cardboard cutouts may work well against daycare centers and ice cream shops, but it's not too effective against armored personnel carriers, helos and special forces.
Want some other conservative examples?
-He's restored some much-needed dignity to the White House.
-The President has cut taxes several times, returning my money to me.
-He's embarassed the impotent and terrorist-enabling United Nations.
-He's routinely nominated conservatives to seats on the bench (and don't even blame him for the filibusters).
-He's made America realize the value of life at all stages, and it's reflected in shifting cultural polling numbers.
-He has (more indirectly than directly) put in place a pro-2nd amendment atmosphere, though I think Sept. 11th gets much of the credit. But the NRA is pleased with its gains over the past three years, including several concealed carry laws.
Now I'll wait for you to ignore all these statements, which directly answer your question, and go straight to other areas which you're ticked off about. And in the end, if you look at the big picture, you'll realize how silly it would be to not re-elect this man.
You don't have to spend money... The next time there's a debate, you should have Cheney, Rice, and Powell, and perhaps Frist and Hastert on all major news shows showing the counterpoint...
It's easy... 2 things, and 2 things only...
1. Challenge the Dims on the lies. Cite specific lies (there should be plenty to choose from) and press the media to ask the questions, directly confront the candidates.
2. Raise the point that the media gives the Dims a free ride. Ask the media "why don't any of you ask the Dims how THEY would do things differently... How THEY would ensure the capture of UBL, SH, how THEY would deal with the WMD issue and terrorism in general...
Listen up fellow FReepers, many people are in fact sheeple, and they'll believe charges (lies/distortions/etc) if they hear them often enough, ESPECIALLY if they continue to go unchallenged...
Remember the the CUT in Medicare? No? Well, most Americans think that Newt wanted a cut, when in fact, he wanted a reduction in spending. The Dims would pound away at that theme constantly, NO Reps would challenge it, so... it became a De Facto cut im voters' minds.
This will continue until they fight back and challenge the lies.
"It's the voters, stupid."
Most of the polls that came out last week actually stabilized, and two rose.
I agree Frist is a disaster, but I think Hastert has been quietly effective. You certainly can't blame the House for failing to move most of the conservative agenda forward.
The real dilemma is that no conservative, including Bush, can "do" the kinds of things with government that would give him the publicity that generates news. The tax cuts have to work their magic, Iraq will continue to pacify, and so on. He could, and should, take an activist stand on border control immigration.
Nevertheless, Rove and the WH team are not undefeated in four election cycles, including two in Texas, one mid-term, and 2000. I trust them, more than Freepers, to know what they are doing. Whatever they think they have in the "new tone," the final fact is that it IS Bush. He isn't going to change, and apparently Rove and others think this is a key to winning.They said a year ago, when Bush's ratings were in the 70s, that the election would be close. Many here thought they were sandbagging, but I learned my lesson on that in 2000.
If reading Fred Barnes constitutes "labor" so be it. Don't know who your "source" is for things not going well in Iraq but it pales in comparison to the troops returning for R&R, from independent groups peforming evals and from unbiased media sources. "The enemy in Iraq is minuscule: a few thousand Baathist diehards allied with Islamic terrorists. They are capable of nothing more than hit-and-run attacks. Roughly 90 percent of Iraq is reasonably secure and stable . . . and though press reports stress the negative, only 70 Americans have been killed in the past four months.
Seems to me the LABOR is from a hate mongering media trying to persuade Americans that we're failing. I'm not persuaded . . . are you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.